If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

There's more to Ruasian interference than Mueller supposed

For Russia, cyber-operations are a subset of overall information warfare and a way to integrate hacking seamlessly into influence campaigns. Russia considers NATO expansion and Western incursions into post-Soviet space existential threats, providing pressing motivations for a response. Furthermore, Moscow views popular uprisings in Ukraine or the Middle East as results of Western interference campaigns, and Russia is fighting back while reestablishing itself as a great power.

However, it is very difficult to measure the true impact of Russian activities. We can measure the number of clicks, likes and shares, for instance, but how do we make a linear connection to outcomes?

We can’t. Even measuring the number of people who show up for rallies initiated by Russians — a form of disruption — doesn’t give a precise metric. Furthermore, a recent study finds that more than 60 percent of Americans now get their news from social-media platforms such as Facebook, where Russia was very active in spreading disinformation. And 1 in 4 Americans were exposed to fake news as well as Russian bots during the 2016 election cycle. Yet finding the link between Russian actions on social media and vote change remains elusive.

Hillary Clinton not winning the White House was highly likely to be one of Russia’s objectives — but not the primary one, as the Mueller indictments suggest. Long-term strategic thinking in Russia looks far beyond one election cycle, allowing for more comprehensive and long-standing foreign policy goals. The election cycles of Western democracies, in contrast, tend to disfavor long-term strategic planning on foreign policy goals.https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.5e82666b8493

Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

- Twitter said on Friday that more than 3,800 accounts had been traced back to Russian state operatives. It gave examples of their tweets, which included an attack on Hillary Clinton’s performance in a presidential debate.

- posts by one Russian state propaganda account were retweeted by senior advisers to Trump, including his son Donald Jr and Kellyanne Conway, who is now a senior aide to the president in the White House.

- Twitter said on Friday that more than 3,800 accounts had been traced back to Russian state operatives. It gave examples of their tweets, which included an attack on Hillary Clinton’s performance in a presidential debate.

- posts by one Russian state propaganda account were retweeted by senior advisers to Trump, including his son Donald Jr and Kellyanne Conway, who is now a senior aide to the president in the White House.

Did anyone not see that coming with Twitter, or Facebook or any other platform?

It's cute to watch some be surprised.

We don't tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters exist.
They already know monsters exist.
We tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters can be killed.

Mueller Zeros In on Story Put Together About Trump Tower Meeting
WASHINGTON — Aboard Air Force One on a flight home from Europe last July, President Trump and his advisers raced to cobble together a news release about a mysterious meeting at Trump Tower the previous summer between Russians and top Trump campaign officials. Rather than acknowledge the meeting’s intended purpose — to obtain political dirt about Hillary Clinton from the Russian government — the statement instead described the meeting as being about an obscure Russian adoption policy.

The statement, released in response to questions from The New York Times about the meeting, has become a focus of the inquiry by Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election. Prosecutors working for Mr. Mueller in recent months have questioned numerous White House officials about how the release came together — and about how directly Mr. Trump oversaw the process. Mr. Mueller’s team recently notified Mr. Trump’s lawyers that the Air Force One statement is one of about a dozen subjects that prosecutors want to discuss in a face-to-face interview of Mr. Trump that is still being negotiated.

The revelation of the meeting was striking: It placed the president’s son and his top campaign officials in direct contact with a Russian lawyer who promised damaging information on Mrs. Clinton, and an email to the president’s son emerged saying that the information was part of Russia’s effort to help the Trump campaign. The special counsel is investigating how those revelations were handled in real time in part because the president was involved in his administration’s response.https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/31/u...s-mueller.html

Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

We don't tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters exist.
They already know monsters exist.
We tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters can be killed.

Mueller Zeros In on Story Put Together About Trump Tower Meeting
WASHINGTON — Aboard Air Force One on a flight home from Europe last July, President Trump and his advisers raced to cobble together a news release about a mysterious meeting at Trump Tower the previous summer between Russians and top Trump campaign officials. Rather than acknowledge the meeting’s intended purpose — to obtain political dirt about Hillary Clinton from the Russian government — the statement instead described the meeting as being about an obscure Russian adoption policy.

The statement, released in response to questions from The New York Times about the meeting, has become a focus of the inquiry by Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election. Prosecutors working for Mr. Mueller in recent months have questioned numerous White House officials about how the release came together — and about how directly Mr. Trump oversaw the process. Mr. Mueller’s team recently notified Mr. Trump’s lawyers that the Air Force One statement is one of about a dozen subjects that prosecutors want to discuss in a face-to-face interview of Mr. Trump that is still being negotiated.

The revelation of the meeting was striking: It placed the president’s son and his top campaign officials in direct contact with a Russian lawyer who promised damaging information on Mrs. Clinton, and an email to the president’s son emerged saying that the information was part of Russia’s effort to help the Trump campaign. The special counsel is investigating how those revelations were handled in real time in part because the president was involved in his administration’s response.https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/31/u...s-mueller.html

Oh wow....operation research.

It's not like any statement by Trump was under oath or even lying to the FBI.

Actually, FBI investigation. You probably mean "opposition research." "Operations research" is what they used to call systems analysis. And in a sense, you're right about "opposition research"; Putin is indeed opposed to America; which is why he did everything he could to help Trump get elected.

It's not like any statement by Trump was under oath or even lying to the FBI.

It merely demonstrates that he was lying about what went on in the meeting, which even his advisor Steve Bannon called "treasonous." Mueller is sorting it out, now.

We'll see if Bannon was right or not. My expectation is that it doesn't amount to treason, but very likely shows conspiracy and obstruction.

Be patient. He's continuing to get data and testimony from the perps who have already plead guilty.

Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

Actually, FBI investigation. You probably mean "opposition research." "Operations research" is what they used to call systems analysis. And in a sense, you're right about "opposition research"; Putin is indeed opposed to America; which is why he did everything he could to help Trump get elected.

It merely demonstrates that he was lying about what went on in the meeting, which even his advisor Steve Bannon called "treasonous." Mueller is sorting it out, now.

We'll see if Bannon was right or not. My expectation is that it doesn't amount to treason, but very likely shows conspiracy and obstruction.

Be patient. He's continuing to get data and testimony from the perps who have already plead guilty.

Yeah, I did mean opposition research.

I'm patient. Bannon was in a snit....there was nothing treasonous about it. And, of course Trump would want to try and avoid the media making a big deal out it. Last I looked, lying isn't a sin in DC.

1. We now know that it was "The Donald" and his team while flying back from Europe, who fabricated a cover story tell the public that the meeting with Donald Jr., Paul Manafort, Jared Kushner and the Russians was a false narrative about orphans!

2 When this meeting with the Russians actually occurred, the President was reportedly in the same building - but Donald Jr would have us believe that he never informed his father!

3. How could Trump Sr invent a cover story for a meeting that he nothing about, and if it had nothing to do with senior members of the Trump Campaign colluding with the Russians seeking "dirt" from the hacked DNC emails, why invent a cover story at all?

4 One of Trump lawyers, Mark Corallo, resigned over this false "orphan" story because he didn't want to be a participant in what "represented a likely obstruction of justice."